So when it says "In standard Espionage, a player makes a move with two different pieces per turn" does it mean that the same piece can't be moved twice in the same turn?

never mind... I just got the answer to my question :)
(they can't)

I seem to be able to take a number 1 soldier with a spy - thats not right is it?

could be a bug....the rules page says a spy can only take another spy or sapper......'course i could be wrong :)

No, I think you're right, thats what the rules say. I didn't take the piece, but the computer would have allowed it.

I think you are right as well. I have not gotten that far in my game, but it is not right according to the rules :oD

Regardless you should be able to attack any piece. That is not the same as taking it. After your move you will find out the result of the attacks.

After I attack an opponent's piece and lose, shouldn't I know the rank of that piece? Shouldn't the "?" be relplaced by the piece's actual value?

No, otherwise I could use my 1's and 2's as spies by attacking pieces to see there value. The best you know is that the piece you attacked was higher than you or a bomb.

We need taken/defeated pieces at the side. I can never remember what value piece I used for an attack. Half the time I can't even remember the last move I made!

<I think that the piece attacked should change to show the minimum value
e.g if I attack and lose with a 2 I should see >2 on the piece.

:)

The "less than" character at the beginning was added by the editor ???

Yes, it seems to do that sometimes...i'm not quite sure why or when... :-)

I aggree. Pieces captured should be shown on the sides.

remember to take notes after every move , it would be better for the notes to be atop the game board forr easy access. i do notes as follows. Captured pieces: 1,1,2,2,4,4,S,etc.... i will also do as follows -3, tis means that i attacked with a 3 and beat teh ? piece! or ill type +2 that means he attacked me with a piece greater than or equal to my 2. the notes are to be used instead of the captured pieces. Its part of the thinking process not to know what has been captured.

Is this why I am losing against you, nothingness ? lol

well i have lots of experience at this game thats all.i made many mistakes in my day.

It would be nice to see the exact list of pieces for small Espionage. I know we start with 20 guys, but it wold be nice to have them listed. That way, in the middle of a game, I could just click on the rules link to recall what I started with!!

Also, we really need a captured pieces section like in chess.

Thanks,
Thad

With the move notations listing origin and destination on all moves, it eliminates one important type of move, found on variations of this game elsewhere. It is the ability to play the "switch"
Say the relative value of one important piece has been determined by your opponent ( not revealed, just determined. Example your 4 was blindly attacked by a 3. Opponent lost a 3 , and now has determined the value of your piece at 4 or greater)
I am not too good in describing how it is done, however here it is:
In a 4 square area, A1,A2,B1,B2, you have the one piece on one corner( say a1) and the other at the opposite corner( B2)(both must be pieces not revealed by a spy). One turn passes where these do not move, then each piece moves to one of the other corners. Now the opponent is not sure where the piece has moved to.


As I said, the move notation given, unfortunately eliminates the ability to do this.
I would like to suggest that the notation be simplified so that the "switch" may become possible.

Lomeinka

for many years thsi "switch" move has been a thorwn in my side. But it has won me many games! I have accepted it as a part of the game. there is a site which plays this game only www.deepmachines.com/bigbattle where you never knwo the value of a piece every thing is done blindly. And believe me it definietly is flawed. I think that the reason they do thsi is to prevent pieces from being suicided and to proect your army more. In real war that would be considered savage. but i think that were gettgin off the subject. In my note taking i wouyld track both pieces for the rest of the game such as A1 and B2 and follow them around and maybe throw a 5 in front of it and i kknow that my ?5? is safe b/c it was a +3.

Not sure if it is fair, but I thought I would mention it here so all have the same oppertunity.

But I've noticed that games in the same tournament all have the volcanos set in the same position, so if another 2 people already have their board set up, you can go and look at their game to see how your board will be setup.

thank you BBW

This game would be better if there were no volcanoes, and if the numbers were bigger, thus easier to see.

I agree that the numbers, and more so with the black pieces, are hard to see. On a quick glance a 4 and a 1 look the same.

If what you say is accurate and if only one of two opponents knows about it, it could then give a mobility advantage at the early stages of the game to the one that knows about the setup. While on one hand I believe that such a situation should be corrected, on the other hand I think that it does not make much difference to the game in the long run.

Well I've noticed mostly in the small espionage game, the volcanos can easly block a couple of vital pieces at the start of the game - so knowing where the volcanos are can help you not place pieces right behind them - easly giving an advantage to that person.

If it could be something that could be corrected, that would be good. But wanted to mention it here so all have the same oppertunity to see the volcanos.

Good point.
In retrospect, my comment "does not make much difference to the game in the long run" was made with the full version in mind.
From playing a similar small version on another site, I will agree that advance knowledge of the volcano placement, could at times give too much of an advantage on the small version. It would be allowing that person the chance to not only establish position within the opponents territory, but also restrict the opponents ability for movement. Very important in the mini, ...err, small version.

Reading through all posts, we have the following subjects mentioned (no particular order):

1. Unfair advantage issue with the non random placement of volcanos in tournaments (
2. Difficulty of viewing pieces due to smallness of the size of the rank numbers
3. A wish for some sort of tally of pieces captured. Several different opinions there
4. Wish for a change on the way moves are notated,so the "switch" would be possible (one for, one against so far)
5.

Reading through all posts, we have the following subjects mentioned (no particular order):

1. Unfair advantage issue with the non random placement of volcanos in tournaments (
2. Difficulty of viewing pieces due to smallness of the size of the rank numbers
3. A wish for some sort of tally of pieces captured. Several different opinions there
4. Wish for a change on the way moves are notated,so the "switch" would be possible (one for, one against so far)
5. No Volcanos. Perhaps another variation

I think all of the above do influence the way the game is played. I pesent this recap so people can voice their opinion on items on the list above or add to it. Some tally can be kept and then presented to Fencer. Some more "traffic" may be needed on this discussion board, before any requestsare "officialy" presented.

Shouldn't we be able to save boards in both Fast Espionage and regular Espionage and use them in either game? I couldn't figure out how to do it if you can.

No, saved boards only apply and can only be used for the variant they were set up for.

Ok, then is anyone else interested in seeing this added as a new feature too? ;-)

well i have a loaded answer for that one! Yes its great feature BUT it is not wise to use teh same board more than once! If your opponent does any kind of studying game positions (which he/she should) than your set up will soon be found out and you will be crushed!

Good point, but for casual play against different opponents, it can be a great feature. Also, the problem you mention exists now the way things are. Also, I usually load a saved board and change just a couple of things. Makes it different enough to keep my opponents guessing without making me start from scratch each time. ;-)

I think the volcanoes are missing in archived games.

Fixed.

does anyoe know abou thow many different volcano setups there are? in each version? i know ive had all 4 in a block in the center and have had them blocking thre whole center up down up down... and have had an off set on the sieds with the middle.. any others? i think that there should be soem other volcano setups.there are almsot infinite possiblities.

The volcanos are always placed symetrically so that each player has them in the same positions. There are 10 squares in which they can be placed (in any of the ten squares in the row on 'your' half of the board farthest from the edge). The formula for the number of ways to choose two squares out of ten is 10!/(10-2)!x2! = 10x9/2 = 45 ways.

I had to look up the proper spelling for the plural of 'volcano' since I've used it two different ways here myself! Looks like both 'volcanos' and 'volcanoes' are both acceptable, at least according to dictionary.com. ;-)

Fencer, you are AWESOME!!

Mahalo (Hawaiian thanks),
Thad

Im aware of the volcanos permutations but why am i only seeing 4 different setups?

A game option for No Volcanos would be superb. They block up the game and make attack very difficult.

I thought when pieces of same power attack each other both are removed. So if 5 strike 5, the striker wins in the way it is done on here? I thought ties were both removed.

in stratego this was teh general rule. but in this version if you attack a same ranked general you win and only he is removed from the playing board!

This then means, indirectly, Spies must be more valuable, since knowing what you are attacking can have a big payout.

If a 4 attacks a 5 and loses, shouldn't the 5 become revealed? Also if a 3 attacks a 4 and loses, the 4 should be revealed, shouldn't it? It can be "only one thing" so why not?

If a 3 attacks and loses it could be a 4 or 5 that it attacked. But even so, that's part of the strategy - why not add more and more helpful features to make the game easier until we might as well let the game play itself?

If you want to keep track, make notes for yourself.

There should at least be a captured pieces pile like in chess.

No t to mention that a 4 will loose to a mine as well... I think the only certain you have is when a 5 attacks and looses... it was definitely a mine in that case...
But I agree with Kevin: it's fine the way it is. This is a strategy and memory game after all, so "automatic revealings" would take some fun out of it...

I'm finding that a player that has more time to track the game, track the pieces, etc... will do a lot beter in this game then someone who does not have the time to study the board.

What I would like to see is an easier way to keep notes about pieces. Here is my idea.

Once the pieces are placed, each "?" piece will be given a number. The piece in A1 with get #1, the piece in B1 will get #2... and so on. Then the you will be able to keep track of pieces a little more.
So in ThomasBarnes example, if your 4 piece attacks the ?13 piece and loses, then in your own notes, you can write ?13 = 5 or mine.

Otherwise, you would have to start tracking, changing your noted every time that piece moves somewhere else, etc.... again to the point that the person who has the most time to study the board will do beter.

Also if the suggestion of having an option of the submit/notes field be moved ABOVE the game board after a move ever gets done, it would be easier to make notes while seeing the board, instead of now looking at the board, scrolling down writing some notes, scrolling back up to look at board, then back down to write, etc...

that would be confusing especially when pieces start getting moved around alot...youll have 13,1,5,6,8,22,30 all next to each other thats way to many numbers. ill jsut keep my note taking ways... 1,2,3,+3,-4,R,S,X,X,1,5,etc.... much easier..